UGA vs. BNO

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

UGA (United States Gasoline Fund LP) and BNO (United States Brent Oil Fund LP) are both Oil & Gas funds from Concierge Technologies - UGA tracks the Front Month Unleaded Gasoline while BNO tracks the Front Month Brent Crude Oil. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, UGA returned 14.27%/yr vs 13.13%/yr for BNO. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. UGA charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for BNO.

Performance

UGA vs. BNO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in United States Gasoline Fund LP (UGA) and United States Brent Oil Fund LP (BNO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, UGA achieves a 70.69% return, which is significantly lower than BNO's 85.31% return. Over the past 10 years, UGA has outperformed BNO with an annualized return of 14.27%, while BNO has yielded a comparatively lower 13.13% annualized return.

UGA

• 1D: -2.73%
• 1M: -12.25%
• YTD: 70.69%
• 6M: 59.72%
• 1Y: 79.48%
• 3Y*: 20.80%
• 5Y*: 24.41%
• 10Y*: 14.27%

BNO

• 1D: -2.71%
• 1M: -9.80%
• YTD: 85.31%
• 6M: 79.66%
• 1Y: 88.71%
• 3Y*: 26.74%
• 5Y*: 23.48%
• 10Y*: 13.13%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

UGA vs. BNO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
UGA United States Gasoline Fund LP	70.69%	-2.00%	3.77%	1.27%	46.34%	68.49%	-24.88%	41.25%	-28.07%	1.69%
BNO United States Brent Oil Fund LP	85.31%	-5.44%	9.67%	-3.43%	35.25%	62.34%	-38.23%	36.01%	-15.30%	15.43%

Correlation

The correlation between UGA and BNO is 0.91, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.91
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.86
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.86
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.84
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 3, 2010	0.84

The correlation between UGA and BNO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.84 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

UGA vs. BNO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

UGA

UGA Risk / Return Rank: 70
UGA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 71
UGA Sortino Ratio Rank: 58
UGA Omega Ratio Rank: 62
UGA Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
UGA Martin Ratio Rank: 70

BNO

BNO Risk / Return Rank: 65
BNO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 65
BNO Sortino Ratio Rank: 57
BNO Omega Ratio Rank: 61
BNO Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
BNO Martin Ratio Rank: 55

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

UGA vs. BNO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for United States Gasoline Fund LP (UGA) and United States Brent Oil Fund LP (BNO). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

	UGA	BNO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.27	2.15	+0.12
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.71	2.65	+0.06
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.37	1.36	0.00
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.37	4.99	+0.38
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.86	9.39	+3.47
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

UGA vs. BNO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current UGA Sharpe Ratio is 2.27, which is comparable to the BNO Sharpe Ratio of 2.15. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of UGA and BNO, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	UGA	BNO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.27	2.15	+0.12
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.71	0.67	+0.05
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.38	0.36	+0.03
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.12	0.14	-0.02

Drawdowns

UGA vs. BNO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum UGA drawdown since its inception was -86.59%, roughly equal to the maximum BNO drawdown of -87.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UGA and BNO.

Drawdown Indicators

	UGA	BNO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-86.59%	-87.06%	+0.47%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.88%	-17.87%	+2.99%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-26.68%	-23.75%	-2.93%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-38.11%	-33.70%	-4.41%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-75.89%	-75.18%	-0.71%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-14.75%	-12.72%	-2.03%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-36.76%	-40.16%	+3.40%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.20%	9.48%	-3.28%

Volatility

UGA vs. BNO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for United States Gasoline Fund LP (UGA) is 11.64%, while United States Brent Oil Fund LP (BNO) has a volatility of 14.12%. This indicates that UGA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BNO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	UGA	BNO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	11.64%	14.12%	-2.48%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	30.48%	36.21%	-5.73%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	35.27%	41.56%	-6.29%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	34.40%	35.40%	-1.00%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	37.27%	36.69%	+0.58%

UGA vs. BNO - Expense Ratio Comparison

UGA has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is lower than BNO's 0.90% expense ratio.

Dividends

UGA vs. BNO - Dividend Comparison

Neither UGA nor BNO has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both UGA and BNO in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.91, UGA and BNO move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, UGA or BNO?

BNO has higher volatility (14.12%) compared to UGA (11.64%). In terms of maximum drawdown, UGA dropped -86.59% vs BNO's -87.06%.

Which ETF is better, UGA or BNO?

On 10-year performance, UGA leads with 14.27% vs 13.13% for BNO. On fees, UGA is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, UGA has been the lower-risk option at 11.64%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, UGA or BNO?

Over the 10-year period, UGA has performed better with a 14.27% return vs 13.13%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, UGA or BNO?

UGA is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for BNO.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, UGA or BNO?

UGA and BNO have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between UGA and BNO?

UGA tracks Front Month Unleaded Gasoline, while BNO tracks Front Month Brent Crude Oil. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for UGA and 0.90% for BNO.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

UGA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.27 vs 2.15), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.